There are ways to identify hacks. The vast majority of hacks are mainstream, and much like a virus, can be added to a definitions database. If that program is active while the client is running, hack detection will flag the account. From there you have grounds for action against an account.
After that its up to a company to take a strong position or compromise, like most games, for the greater revenue. Often game companies conclude that the revenue gained from cheaters is worth more than the relatively small harm it does to the average player. That is why you see the same hacks for games like WoW for years and years until there is public outcry and Blizzard suddenly decides its against their best interests to allow it to continue.
As to those saying you can't recognize bots, I say phooey to that. Yes, its "hypothetically" possible to create a bot that is undetectable, but creating one that works well with other players is problematic to say the least. The number of variables is too great, and automation becomes obvious. That is why you see most bots farming away from other people. They are much harder to distinguish.
There are ways to identify hacks. The vast majority of hacks are mainstream, and much like a virus, can be added to a definitions database. If that program is active while the client is running, hack detection will flag the account. From there you have grounds for action against an account.
After that its up to a company to take a strong position or compromise, like most games, for the greater revenue. Often game companies conclude that the revenue gained from cheaters is worth more than the relatively small harm it does to the average player. That is why you see the same hacks for games like WoW for years and years until there is public outcry and Blizzard suddenly decides its against their best interests to allow it to continue.
As to those saying you can't recognize bots, I say phooey to that. Yes, its "hypothetically" possible to create a bot that is undetectable, but creating one that works well with other players is problematic to say the least. The number of variables is too great, and automation becomes obvious. That is why you see most bots farming away from other people. They are much harder to distinguish.
Do you remember when the Logitech G15 keyboard came out and how several companies banned its use because you could do on the fly memory macroing which could not be detected (ie it was firmware initiated and controlled). I mean, I can actually just install a generic keyboard driver for it and still be able to use the on board macros.
(edit: For some reason when you said hack, I was thinking just botting automation. As for Hacks that is a whole different debate in and of itself as that is modifying the client data. I am talking about basic botting, not client manipulation).
We aren't saying you "can't" as in it is impossible, rather it is extraordinarily difficult, especially when it comes to determining the difference between botting and boxing.
Lets face it, VR are game designers, not security experts as in order to deal with such you need a ton of knowledge at multiple layers of the technology. They aren't going to be able to deal with those intricacies with their budget and using stock development tools. To fight it would require a proprietary security product tailored to their tools, engine and design.
Again, as I said... seeing what appears to be botting and proving are two different things. I used multiple examples to show how botting and boxing can cross over with each other in their automation to make it seem like it is one or the other. This is not an easy issue and I think that is why VR has taken a neutral policy of discouragement rather than a solid active stance.
I'll leave this thread with this (as I'm not likely to play this game) if botting is so unstoppable, how can a developer stop people from multiboxing in the first place.?
My guess is they could not stop someone from running a separate account on different computer and joining them all together with a single set of controls.
In fact back in 2003 a guy did that on Mordred and ran 9 accounts on 9 computers all running as an Animist and with single controller could drop 20 or more turrets simultaneously.
He really was doing a primative form of botting, but how would you stop him?
This is really what we're trying to make you understand, if boxing is illegal, dev's have all the tools they need to ban both boxers and botters and prove it, because as some have said, it is easy for us players to tell if someone is running 2 characters, the hard part is proving it is BOTTING and not BOXING, if both are bannable, then doing either results in a ban and is easily dealt with, enabling 1 enables the other.
Comments
After that its up to a company to take a strong position or compromise, like most games, for the greater revenue. Often game companies conclude that the revenue gained from cheaters is worth more than the relatively small harm it does to the average player. That is why you see the same hacks for games like WoW for years and years until there is public outcry and Blizzard suddenly decides its against their best interests to allow it to continue.
As to those saying you can't recognize bots, I say phooey to that. Yes, its "hypothetically" possible to create a bot that is undetectable, but creating one that works well with other players is problematic to say the least. The number of variables is too great, and automation becomes obvious. That is why you see most bots farming away from other people. They are much harder to distinguish.
(edit: For some reason when you said hack, I was thinking just botting automation. As for Hacks that is a whole different debate in and of itself as that is modifying the client data. I am talking about basic botting, not client manipulation).
We aren't saying you "can't" as in it is impossible, rather it is extraordinarily difficult, especially when it comes to determining the difference between botting and boxing.
Lets face it, VR are game designers, not security experts as in order to deal with such you need a ton of knowledge at multiple layers of the technology. They aren't going to be able to deal with those intricacies with their budget and using stock development tools. To fight it would require a proprietary security product tailored to their tools, engine and design.
Again, as I said... seeing what appears to be botting and proving are two different things. I used multiple examples to show how botting and boxing can cross over with each other in their automation to make it seem like it is one or the other. This is not an easy issue and I think that is why VR has taken a neutral policy of discouragement rather than a solid active stance.